Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> __/ [ Hadron Quark ] on Monday 21 August 2006 11:08 \__
>
>> ws <see.sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33812
>>>
>>> So what does this have to do with Linux? There is the matter of
>>> OpenGL. Now if Intel support for OpenGL is in the hardware, guess what
>>> would be the preferred platform for OpenGL development under Linux and
>>> other OSS systems?
>>
>> That is quite interesting. What we reall need, of course, is to hear
>> about leading games manufacturers like Valve hiring openGL programmers -
>> then we would see a huge boost in Linux uptake.
>
> I came across the following yesterday.
>
> http://www.petitiononline.com/hllinux1/petition-sign.html?
I thought I was back in the killfile after you erroneously accused me of
supporting that impersonation?
>
> But be sure that someone will always sabotage the acceptance of OpenGL.
>
> http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/openglvista
FWIW, I think MSs decision to kill support for openGL is awful. By all
means map openGL to directX but continue to upgrade the necessary APIs
as they change.
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | In the current implementation (as of 2005-09-22) of the OpenGL
> | graphics library in Windows Vista - a soon to be released new version
> | of the Microsoft Windows operating system, OpenGL is not a stand
> | alone library. Instead it functions as a wrapper around DirectX,
> | and is frozen to the vanilla version of OpenGL 1.4.
> |
> | This means that OpenGL applications in Windows Vista will,
> | most likely, suffer from severe performance loss, that, when an
> | OpenGL driver is loaded, the Windows operating system will have
> | odd behaviours and that future versions of OpenGL will not affect
> | Windows Vista platform. This would result in less developers
> | actively supporting OpenGL, and as a result, less applications
> | written which are easy to port to another platform or easy to
> | maintain.
> `----
--
|
|
